For citation:
Orekhovsky, P. A. & Nureev, R. M. (2023). Scholasticism in Economics as a Symptom of an Unavoidable Crisis. AlterEconomics, 20(1), 9–28. https://doi.org/10.31063/AlterEconomics/2023.20-1.2
Abstract:
An academic text being described as ‘scholastic’ is usually perceived as a criticism, pointing to the text’s formal, dogmatic character. This characteristic was used from time to time in relation to the works of social scientists in the USSR. This term is much less common in modern academia, including the discussion of modern economic writings. This does not mean, however, that many of these papers do not deserve to be described as such, given the ever-increasing number of publications. The article puts forward a hypothesis that there is a connection between the scholastic style of reasoning and the construction of economic texts, signifying the onset of a crisis in economic research, accompanied by a transition to a full-scale socio-economic crisis. This hypothesis is being tested on the basis of two historical precedents — medieval scholasticism proper and the political economy of socialism. In both cases, the term ‘scholastic’ was applied relatively frequently to published texts. In addition, during the periods of feudal or Soviet scholasticism, the dominant role was played by religion or, in the case of the Soviet Union, ideology and its dominance was also reinforced by power hierarchies. While in the case of feudalism it was the Vatican that held the ‘monopoly on truth’, in the USSR this role was played by Marxism-Leninism and the Politburo of the CPSU. In the case of the Middle Ages, the authors use Thomas Aquinas’ Summa Theologia as the main object of discursive analysis and as for the Soviet period, the analysis focuses on the monograph Political Economy — Theoretical Foundation of the CPSU’s Policy published in 1989 by Soviet theoretical economists. Along with these sources, we also look at the works of A. Greif and E. Gaidar, showing a critical discrepancy between the scholastic discourse and economic reality.
Abalkin, L. I., Medvedev, V. A., Bulatov, A. Ye. et al. (1989). Politicheskaya ekonomiya — teoreticheskaya osnova politiki KPSS: Kurs lektsiy [Political Economy –Theoretical Basis of the Policy of the CPSU: Course of Lectures]. In L. I. Abalkin (Eds.). Moscow, Russia: Mysl’ Publ., 606. (In Russ.)
Abel, W. (1962). Geschichte der deutschen Landwirtschaft vom frühen Mittelalter bis zum 19. Jahrhundert [History of German Agriculture from the early Middle Ages until the 19th Century]. Stuttgart: Ulmer, 361. (In German)
Ackoff, R. L. (1985). Planirovaniye budushchego korporatsii [Creating the Corporate Future. Plan or be planned for]. Moscow: Progress Publ., 327. (In Russ.)
Agamben, G. (2011). Homo Sacer. Suverennaya vlast’ i golaya zhizn’ [Homo Sacer. Sovereign Power and Bare Life]. Moscow, Russia: Europe, 256. (In Russ.)
Aquinas, Thomas. (2013). Summa teologii. Chast’ 2.2. (Voprosy 47–122) [The Summa Theologica. Part 2.2. (Questions 47–122)]. Kyiv, Ukraine: Nika-Center, 832. Retrieved from: https://azbyka.ru/otechnik/konfessii/summa-teologii-tom-8/31 (Date of access: 27.11.2022). (In Russ.)
Averintsev, S. S. (2003). Skholastika [Scholasticism]. Slovar’ srednevekovoy kul’tury [Dictionary of Medieval Culture]. Moscow, Russia: ROSSPEN, 515–520. (In Russ.)
Braudel, F. (2006). Material’naya tsivilizatsiya i kapitalizm. T. 2. Igry obmena. [Material civilization and capitalism. Vol. 2: The Games of Exchange]. Moscow, Russia: Ves’ Mir Publ., 632. (In Russ.)
de Soto, H. (2007). Inoy put’. Ekonomicheskiy otvet terrorizmu [The Other Path: The Economic Answer to Terrorism]. Chelyabinsk, Russia: Sotsium Publ., 408. (In Russ.)
Gaidar, E. T. (2012). Gibel’ imperii. Uroki dlya sovremennoy Rossii [Collapse of an Empire: Lessons for Modern Russia]. Moscow, Russia: ACT Publ., 447. (In Russ.)
Gentile, E. (2021). Politicheskiye religii. Mezhdu demokratiyey i totalitarizmom [Political Religions. Between Democracy and Totalitarianism]. St Petersburg, Russia: Vladimir Dal’ Publ., 400. (In Russ.)
Greif, A. (2013). Instituty i put’ k sovremennoy ekonomike. Uroki srednevekovoy torgovli [Institutions and the Path to the Modern Economy: Lessons from Medieval Trade]. Translated by Innа Kushnarevа. Moscow, Russia: HSE Publishing House, 531. (In Russ.)
Le Goff, J. (1992). Tsivilizatsiya srednevekovogo Zapada [The Civilization of the Medieval West]. Moscow, Russia: Progress, Progress-Akademiya Publ., 376. (In Russ.)
Lefort, C. (1986). The Political Forms of Modern Society: Bureaucracy, Democracy, Totalitarianism. Cambridge: MA, MIT Press, 352.
McCloskey, D. N. (2015). Ritorika ekonomicheskoy nauki [The Rhetoric of economics]. Translated from English by O. Yakimenko. Moscow, Russia: Gaydar Inst. Publ.; St. Petersburg, Russia: Faculty of Liberal Arts and Sciences of St. Petersburg State University, 328. (In Russ.)
Nureev, R. M. & Orekhovsky, P. A. (2021a). Diskussii osnovnogo proizvodstvennogo otnosheniya v politekonomii sotsializma: kognitivnyy tupik 1970-kh [Debates around the Basic Production Relationship in Political Economy of Socialism: The Cognitive Deadlock in the 1970s]. Zhurnal ekonomicheskoj teorii, 18 (2), 185–196. https://doi.org/10.31063/2073-6517/2021.18-2.2 (In Russ.)
Nureev, R. M. & Orekhovsky, P. A. (2021b). Diskussiya vokrug proizvoditel’nykh sil (Politekonomiya sotsializma: kognitivnyy tupik 1970-kh) [Discussion around the productive forces (Political economy of socialism: cognitive deadlock of the 1970-s)]. Aktual’nyye problemy ekonomiki i prava [Actual Problems of Economics and Law], 15 (2), 197–214. http://dx.doi.org/10.21202/1993-047X.15.2021.2.197-214 (In Russ.)
Nureev, R. M. & Orekhovsky, P. A. (2021c). Diskussii ob aziatskom sposobe proizvodstva (Politekonomiya sotsializma: kognitivnyy tupik 1970-kh) [Discussions about the Asian mode of production (The political economy of socialism: the cognitive deadlock of the 1970s)]. Journal of Economic Regulation, 12 (2), 6–21. https://doi.org/10.17835/2078-5429.2021.12.2.006-021 (In Russ.)
Nureev, R. M. (2005). Y. A. Shumpeter: Rol’ skholastiki v istorii ekonomicheskogo analiza [J. A. Shumpeter: the Role of Scholastics in History of Economic Analysis]. Ekonomicheskiy Vestnik Rostovskogo universiteta [Economic Bulletin of Rostov University], 3 (4), 20–27. (In Russ.)
Nureev, R. M. (2011). Kratkiy kurs istorii VKP(b) v krivom zerkale partiynoy propagandy [A short course on the history of the CPSU in the distorting mirror of party propaganda]. Zhurnal institutsional’nykh issledovaniy [Journal of Institutional Studies], 3 (1), 83–92. (In Russ.)
Schumpeter, J. A. (2001). Istoriya ekonomicheskogo analiza [History of Economic Analysis]. Vol. 1. Translated and edited by V. S. Avtonomov. St. Petersburg, Russia: The School of Economics, 496. (In Russ.)
Sokolov, M. & Titaev, K. (2013). Provintsial’naya i tuzemnaya nauka [“Provincial” and “Indigenous” Scholarship in the Humanities and Social Sciences]. Antropologicheskiy forum [Forum for Anthropology and Culture], 19, 239–275. (In Russ.)
Voegelin, E. (2021). Novaya nauka politiki. Vvedeniye. [The new science of politics: An introduction]. St. Petersburg, Russia: Vladimir Dal’ Publ., 372. (In Russ.)
Weber, M. (2006). Izbrannoye: protestantskaya etika i dukh kapitalizma [Collected: The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism]. Moscow, Russia: ROSSPEN Publ., 648. (In Russ.)
Yurchak A. (2014). Eto bylo navsegda, poka ne konchilos’. Posledneye sovetskoye pokoleniye [Everything Was Forever, Until It Was No More: The Last Soviet Generation]. Moscow, Russia: Novoye literaturnoye obozreniye, 664. (In Russ.)